{
  "id": 2673160,
  "name": "The People ex rel. John Sullivan v. Samuel S. Hake, Mayor, etc.",
  "name_abbreviation": "People ex rel. Sullivan v. Hake",
  "decision_date": "1876-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "540",
  "last_page": "540",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "81 Ill. 540"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "20 Ill. 159",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2594712
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "263"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/20/0159-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 125,
    "char_count": 1279,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.499,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.754042199811549e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5311458312820554
    },
    "sha256": "8e9e29f189b08206b42b86a63a7007a2df3de36f4ced19945d15c5f46eb9cb08",
    "simhash": "1:9755304c7d49c889",
    "word_count": 232
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:06:43.418924+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The People ex rel. John Sullivan v. Samuel S. Hake, Mayor, etc."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam:\nIt appears by the record in this case that the respondent is enjoined in another proceeding from doing precisely the same thing that it is here sought to compel him to do by mandarmis, and that such proceeding is now pending for hearing at the next term in the southern division. The adjudication in that case will settle the question attempted to he raised in this, Rnd, on the principle announced in People ex rel. etc. v. Warfield, 20 Ill. 159, and People ex rel. v. Wiant, 48 id. 263, memdamus will not he awarded.\nMandamus refused.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam:"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. E. F. Wingate, for the relator.",
      "Messrs. Bowman & Halbert, for the respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People ex rel. John Sullivan v. Samuel S. Hake, Mayor, etc.\nMandamus-\u2014to do act enjoined. Where it appears that a party is enjoined from, doing the same thing that it is then sought to compel him to do, hy mandamus, and the adjudication in the injunction suit is pending before this court, a mandamus will be refused.\nThis is a petition under chapter 87 of the R. S. 1874, praying a mandamus against Hake, as mayor of East St. Louis, and the clerk, to compel them to issue and deliver to the relator a certain certificate for $210, payable out of a special appropriation of $1000, made hy the city for its health department, for the year 1876.\nMr. E. F. Wingate, for the relator.\nMessrs. Bowman & Halbert, for the respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0540-01",
  "first_page_order": 540,
  "last_page_order": 540
}